I'm not disagreeing with anyone, I just knew this person remembered living in London at the time so I asked them some questions. It's possible she recollects fake newsreels or post-war footage and has projected that vision onto her experiences. I don't trust my own memories from six years old so I'm not going to trust her's anyway.

The simplest explanation is that the V2 bombings were faked while the citizens were hiding in shelters. Why bomb people if you don't have to? For now it's the most reasonable assumption.

My comment about who won was in response to this:

I think WW2 was basically a Conflict between Zionists and the Vatican.

I was asking who antipodean considers to have won out of the Zionists and Vatican.

Obviously the Zionists (bankers) won. Italy (Vatican) swapped sides when the Allies were looking like they were going to defeat Hitler.I think some of this has been discussed here before. Sorry I can't link to anything at the moment my computer is playing up, having to use an Ipad .

dblitz wrote:I'm not disagreeing with anyone, I just knew this person remembered living in London at the time so I asked them some questions. It's possible she recollects fake newsreels or post-war footage and has projected that vision onto her experiences. I don't trust my own memories from six years old so I'm not going to trust her's anyway.

The simplest explanation is that the V2 bombings were faked while the citizens were hiding in shelters. Why bomb people if you don't have to? For now it's the most reasonable assumption.

My comment about who won was in response to this:

I think WW2 was basically a Conflict between Zionists and the Vatican.

I was asking who antipodean considers to have won out of the Zionists and Vatican.

I wasn't being conflictive, I feel that these sort of questions must be asked.

We don't do Inspector Lestrade type evidence based investigations here, [which is exactly what others do regarding "9/11"], we must look at all these events in abstract.

There were reportedly types of "flying bombs" other than the V1. Some were dropped by planes.

Maybe I'm a sap about this but I think there is enough evidence to support the existence of some flying bombs/rockets and I don't doubt that they could get them to fly. I think the hoax was that they could hit and destroy intended targets with them. That is, that they were effective weapons of war.

I can see that there is fakery in the films but I think there is enough footage that looks real enough to show these things existed and could be shot into the air and fly some distance at least.

Germany did develop jet aircraft during this period such as the ME-262 and others. A few of them are even still airworthy. So, I don't think it would be that tough for them to attach a ramjet to a bomb and shoot it into the air from a ramp. I just don't think they could hit an intended target with them such as a city in England from Germany, France, etc. as we are told they did. But, maybe a few of these things did make it to populated areas in England. That doesn't necessarily mean they were really armed with a warhead though. If they didn't really know where the thing would land I doubt they'd actually put any explosives in it. After all, they might hurt their pal Churchill by mistake or -- god forbid -- a Bush or Rockefeller.

After the liberation of Belgium, starting in 13/10/1944, the Germans supposedly tried to use the V2 as a strategic weapon to prevent the use of the strategic harbor of Antwerp. Without any success, it didn't stop the use of the harbor even for a day. Given the resources and manpower that had to be used to build them this obviously doesn't makes sense. But that can conveniently be blamed on the irrationality of Hitler.

Interestingly, in Antwerp the public was warned beforehand that when the bombs were used the media couldn't provide reliable information about the impacts. Because they didn't want the Germans to know if they were successful. I presume this was also the case in Britain, because of the stories of the spies telling they were overshooting London.This leads to an interesting question: would the media blackout have made it more difficult to fake the bombs because they couldn't show any video or pictures?Or would it have been easier because they had only to spread the right rumors, and nobody was able to debunk them?The participants of the hoax could be told that they were doing this to confuse the Germans.

The missile first struck Staveley Road, a fairly quiet street in one of London’s suburban districts. It landed near Chiswick station on the eighth of September in 1944, where it killed three people. The youngest casualty was a young girl named Rosemary Clarke, who was only three years of age. The V2 rocket left a thirty-foot crater, destroying over ten houses and damaging for than five hundred. Given this level of destruction, the number of deaths was fortunately small. The number of injuries, on the other hand, was much higher. John Clarke, Rosemary Clarke’s brother, had a mild hand injury. He remembers seeing that his sister’s body was not badly damaged, but the force of the blast had caused her lungs to collapse.

At the time of the explosion, many were not fully aware of the cause. A number of witnesses believed that the explosion was caused by a faulty gas main, though the depth of the crater and the lack of piping in the debris raised suspicions. The V2 rocket became known colloquially as a “flying gas pipe” due to the confused rumors. Officials did not reveal any detailed information on the weapon until two months later, but many were aware of the nature of the attack within one hour of the explosion.

Londoners were not new to such attacks. They had already suffered the Blitz years ago. The reason that this particular attack came as something of a surprise is that, less than a week before the V2 rocket hit, it had been reported that the Germans did not likely have the capabilities to fire such weapons as far as London. This turned out to be far from true.

Less then a week before it hit, what a coincidence.

In Antwerp, the city and the media were controlled by the Allied forces. If V2 rockets were a hoax, the same people could have been employed and moved from London to Antwerp. This is an official picture attributed to the US Signal Corps, that is widely used. the title is "This boy's dead body, aflame, bears ghastly witness of the horror of the damage done by V-2 on main intersection in Antwerp on main supply line to Holland. Belgium, November 27, 1944.". (see http://research.archives.gov/description/531329)

Why do I think it is fake?It is the sharpest picture I found of that period. Yet unlike other pictures, where a photographer could really take his time choosing the best conditions, using a tripod... this one is supposed to be taken In a crisis situation. The soldiers look like they are just strolling around as if there is no emergency at all, while the man or boy is still smoking. How do they or the photographer know he is beyond rescuing? If they have something more urgent to do, why are they not running? Why is the jeep burning, it doesn't look like it was very close to where the bomb must have dropped? What kind of bomb would set a jeep on fire (an atomb bomb?).The man is not much farther from the camera than the jeep, yet they are of similar height. That doesn't seem right. Why are the stones around the jeep darker?The official identifier of the photo is 111-SC-232557, the date in the title is November 27, 1944. But how come there are pictures that are supposed to be older, that have a lower number as identifier? For example "Troops Find Loot Hidden in Church, 04/24/1945 " is number 111-SC-204899. (I am not saying that picture is real, it is found at http://research.archives.gov/description/5757187.) It looks like the picture was made after the war.(I saw a closeup of the same scene in a video about the bombs at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOt8_yMp0KY)

As for the reasons why the V2 rockets would have been hoaxed I have some suggestions:The V2 rockets were obviously very important to promote the idea of space travel. So they were a crucial part of consequent space hoaxes.For example: When Hergé made his comic "Objectif Lune" (Destination Moon), published in 1950 he used the V2 as a model (adding a nuclear engine)

The V2 also gave us the concept of ballistic missiles. I think they were an essential element of the nuke scare. If nuclear bombs had to be dropped by a plane they would be much easier to intercept and less scary. We wouldn't have the image of an unstoppable Armageddon by pressing a button we have now.

Possibly (some) modern ballistic missiles are also a hoax. With terminal speeds of over 5000 m/s, wouldn't they burn up like a meteor?

Edit: possibly instead of possible

Last edited by Seneca on March 5th, 2015, 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

"The Paris Gun (German: Paris-Geschütz) was the name given to a type of German long-range siege gun, several of which were used to bombard Paris during World War I. They were in service from March to August 1918. When the guns were first employed, Parisians believed they had been bombed by a high-altitude Zeppelin, as neither the sound of an aeroplane nor a gun could be heard. They were the largest pieces of artillery used during the war by barrel length if not caliber, and are considered to be superguns. The Paris Guns hold an important place in the history of astronautics, as their shells were the first man-made objects to reach the stratosphere"

"Under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, the Germans were required to turn over a complete Paris Gun to the Allies, but they never complied with this.

In the 1930s, the German Army became interested in rockets for long range artillery as a replacement for the Paris Gun—which was specifically banned under the Versailles Treaty. This work would eventually lead to the V-2 rocket that was used in World War II.

Despite the ban, Krupp continued theoretical work on long-range guns. They started experimental work after the Nazi government began funding the project upon coming to power in 1933. This research led to the 21 cm K 12 (E), a refinement of the Paris Gun design.[10] Although broadly similar in size and range to its predecessor, Krupps' engineers had significantly reduced the problem of barrel wear. They also improved mobility over the fixed Paris Gun by making the K12 a railway gun.

The first K12 was delivered to the German Army in 1939 and a second in 1940. During World War 2, they were deployed in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region of France; they were used to shell Kent in Southern England between late 1940 and early 1941. One gun was captured by Allied forces in the Netherlands in 1945"

"A behemoth, the Paris Gun - regarded by many as the ancestor to the German V3 - was capable of firing shells into the stratosphere from locations as far as 131km from Paris."

"The Paris Gun was nevertheless a notable propaganda success at home in Germany. The Allies searched in vain for the guns during the German retreat of August 1918 onwards and after the armistice, but in vain. No example of the Paris Gun has been located then or since although U.S. forces located one of the gun's spare mountings."

The Mythic Paris Gun - 'most colossal gun ever'A gun that was never located. The only 'evidence' we have is just a story told to the mass public.

Notice how a supposed mainstream scientific meme is promoted much in the same way such ideas would be promoted by the films and accounts of the mythic World War Two era technology.

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjhoJaIgxDM

"The flight was said to take about three minutes. How far will Paris move, due to the rotation of the earth, during flight?

Presuming that the cannon is North East of Paris, it will be moving eastward at a slower speed than is Paris. A shell that is fired will have the eastward velocity of the gun and, as it travels southerly, it could be seen to be traveling eastward more slowly than the ground beneath it. This makes the shell appear to have a westward deflection that the gunner should take into account. There is no force causing this apparent deflection. It is called the Coriolis effect. It is an effect of earth's rotation."

H.G. Wells predicts the London Bombings in this 1936 film, Things To Come:

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atwfWEKz00U

At around 10:29 the streets are cleared and the people ordered to get out of the street. Now they can't see what is happening.

At around 18:00 we get some fighter airplane special effect shots.

This is the "New World Order" film. The world war results in the nations of the world united, much like our actual history.

Notice how this narrative is very similar to the Paris Gun narrative. In the latter the citizens of Paris were told by the authorities that a gun had been fired at them. They themselves had no clue as to what was going on. In the bombing of London narrative, we have the streets cleared due to the V1 or V2 rocket attacks.

It is funny how an H.G. Wells novel provides material for an infamous 'prank' that Orson Wells pulled on the public two years later.

How much of our history is actually scripted? Could some of these event script-writers have been people who would become popular novelists and film directors and the like? What about the technicians and behind the scenes artists as well? Did they go on to do special effects and editing for Hollywood? Were they always one and the same?

"Why We Fight is a series of seven documentary films commissioned by the United States government for propaganda during World War II whose purpose was to show American soldiers the reason for U.S. involvement in the war. Later on they were also shown to the general U.S. public to persuade them to support American involvement in the war.

Most of the films were directed by Frank Capra, who was daunted yet impressed and challenged by Leni Riefenstahl's propaganda film Triumph of the Will and worked in direct response to it. The series faced a tough challenge: convincing a recently non-interventionist nation of the need to become involved"

It is interesting how a mythic technology is associated with a mythic scientific concept over and over. Here the long range gun and the concept of the Earth's rotation are linked. Compare to the Lunar landing obsession and rocketry. These subjects end up all meeting up again, don't they? The mythic V1 and V2 rockets and NAZI rocket scientists working with Walt Disney, immediately come to mind. Our history seems so absurd.

"The Paris Gun was a weapon like no other, but its capabilities are not known with full certainty. This is due to the weapon's apparent total destruction by the Germans in the face of the Allied offensive. Figures stated for the weapon's size, range, and performance varied widely depending on the source — not even the number of shells fired is certain. With the discovery (in the 1980s) and publication (in the Bull and Murphy book) of a long note on the gun written shortly before his death in 1926 by Dr. Fritz Rausenberger, who was in charge of its development at Krupp, the details of its design and capabilities were considerably clarified."

"The Paris gun was used to shell Paris at a range of 120 km (75 mi). The distance was so far that the Coriolis effect — the rotation of the Earth — was substantial enough to affect trajectory calculations. The gun was fired at an azimuth of 232 degrees (west-southwest) from Crépy-en-Laon, which was at a latitude of 49.5 degrees North."

"The gun was fired from the forest of Coucy and the first shell landed at 7:18 a.m. on 21 March 1918 on the Quai de la Seine, the explosion being heard across the city. Shells continued to land at 15 minute intervals, with 21 counted on the first day. The initial assumption was these were bombs dropped from an airplane or Zeppelin flying too high to be seen or heard. But within a few hours, sufficient casing fragments had been collected to show that the explosions were the result of shells, not bombs. By the end of the day, military authorities were aware the shells were being fired from behind German lines by a new long-range gun, although there was initially wild press speculation on the origin of the shells. This included the theory they were being fired by German agents close by Paris, or even within the city itself, so abandoned quarries close to the city were searched for a hidden gun. However, the actual gun was found within days by the French air reconnaissance aviator Didier Daurat."

I see evidence that the Paris Gun was an 'inside job'. But that's me. Its hard not to see parallels to events like 9/11.Hurricane spirals and weather patterns are easily explained as a result of electromagnetic waves, as evidenced by the workings of a compass.

Who was Coriolis? He was from Paris of all places. Could the French simply have been promoting their own 'science'?

Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis"Coriolis was born in Paris in 1792. In 1808 he sat the entrance exam and was placed second of all the students entering that year, and in 1816, he became a tutor at the École Polytechnique, where he did experiments on friction and hydraulics."